Asia

Lahore, Pakistan – As funerals were held on Saturday for more than 30 people killed in a suicide bombing at a mosque in Islamabad, analysts warned the attack could be part of a broader attempt to inflame sectarian tensions in the country.

A suicide bomber struck the Khadija Tul Kubra Mosque, a Shia place of worship, in the Tarlai Kalan area of southeastern Islamabad during Friday prayers.

In a statement, the Islamabad administration said 169 people were transferred to hospitals after rescue teams reached the site.

Hours later, a splinter faction of the ISIL (ISIS) group in Pakistan claimed responsibility on its Telegram channel, releasing an image it said showed the attacker holding a gun, his face covered and eyes blurred.

Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif said mosque security guards tried to intercept the suspect, who opened fire before detonating explosives among worshippers. He alleged the attacker had been travelling to and from Afghanistan.

Security officials on Saturday told Al Jazeera that several key arrests had been made, including close family members of the suicide bomber in Peshawar and Karachi. They did not clarify whether there was evidence of their involvement in the plot.

Capital under fire?

Islamabad had seen a relative lull in violence in past years, but things have changed in recent months. The bombing marked the second major attack in the federal capital since a suicide blast targeted a district court in November last year.

Abdul Sayed, a Sweden-based analyst on conflict in Afghanistan and Pakistan, said ISIL’s Pakistan branch, referred to as ISPP, claimed responsibility for what appears to be its deadliest operation in the country since its formation in May 2019.

“Since its formation, ISPP has carried out approximately 100 attacks, more than two-thirds of which occurred in Balochistan. These attacks include three suicide bombings targeting Afghan Taliban members, police, and security forces in Balochistan,” Sayed, founder of the Oxus Watch research platform, told Al Jazeera.

Pakistan has witnessed a steady rise in violence from fighters over the past three years. Data released by the Pak Institute of Peace Studies for 2025 recorded 699 attacks nationwide, a 34 percent increase compared with the previous year.

Islamabad has repeatedly accused the Afghan Taliban, who returned to power in August 2021 following the withdrawal of United States forces, of providing a haven to armed groups that launch attacks inside Pakistan from Afghan soil.

The Afghan Taliban condemned Friday’s mosque bombing and have consistently denied sheltering anti-Pakistan fighters.

In October, this very issue ignited the deadliest border clashes between the two sides in years, which killed dozens of people and led to evacuations on both sides.

A United Nations report last year stated that the Afghan Taliban provides support to the Pakistan Taliban, or TTP, which has carried out multiple attacks across Pakistan.

The report also said the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) has ties with both the TTP and ISIL’s affiliate in Khorasan Province (ISKP), indicating a convergence of groups with distinct but intersecting agendas.

Just days ago, Pakistan’s military concluded a weeklong security operation in the restive southwestern Balochistan province, claiming the deaths of 216 fighters in targeted offensives.

A military statement on Thursday said it followed the province-wide attacks by the separatist BLA carried out to “destabilise the peace of Balochistan”.

Fahad Nabeel, who heads the Islamabad-based consultancy Geopolitical Insights, said Pakistan is likely to maintain its hardened stance towards Kabul, citing what he described as Afghanistan’s failure to act against anti-Pakistan fighter groups.

He added that officials would probably share preliminary findings of the investigation and point to a possible Afghan link.

“The upward trajectory of terrorist attacks witnessed last year is expected to continue this year. Serious efforts need to be made to identify networks of facilitators based in and around major urban centres, who are facilitating militant groups to carry out terrorist attacks,” Nabeel told Al Jazeera.

Sectarian fault lines

Manzar Zaidi, a Lahore-based security analyst, cautioned against equating the latest bombing with the district court attack last year.

“The last year’s attack was essentially a target on a state institution, whereas this one was plainly sectarian in nature, something that has certainly gone done in the recent times, and that is why I will urge caution against a knee-jerk reaction to conflate the two incidents,” he told Al Jazeera.

Shia make up more than 20 percent of Pakistan’s population of about 250 million. The country has experienced periodic bouts of sectarian violence, particularly in Kurram district in northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, which borders Afghanistan.

Regional tensions have added to domestic anxieties.

Zaidi said armed groups in the region backed by Iran remain alert amid “the simmering geopolitical tensions”.

“For Pakistan, it really has to keep a close eye on how things develop in Kurram region, where things can get out of control and there could be a fallout. The region currently has an uneasy peace; that can easily be instabilised,” he said.

Kurram, a tribal district bordering Afghanistan, has a roughly equal Sunni and Shia population. It has long been a flashpoint for sectarian clashes and witnessed prolonged fighting last year.

Nabeel said a timely conclusion to the investigation could shape the government’s response and help prevent the attack from becoming a trigger for wider sectarian unrest.

“However, the possibility of low-intensity sectarian targeting in different parts of the country is likely,” he warned.

Sayed added that an examination of Pakistani nationals who joined ISIL and affiliated groups shows that many came from anti-Shia Sunni armed organisations.

“The role of these sectarian elements is therefore an important factor in understanding such attacks. Moreover, such attacks appear significant in facilitating further recruitment of anti-Shia Sunni extremists within Pakistan, thereby contributing to IS efforts to strengthen its networks in the country,” he said.

After Pakistan announced their boycott of the forthcoming T20I World Cup match against India, the International Cricket Council (ICC) was quick to lament the position the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) had put fans in. “[Pakistan’s] decision is not in the interest of the global game or the welfare of fans worldwide,” the ICC said in a release, before going on to make special mention of “millions in Pakistan”, who will now have no India fixture to anticipate.

Through the course of this statement, and the one the previous week, justifying the ICC’s ultimatum to the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) – which eventually led to Bangladesh’s exit from the tournament – the ICC leaned on ideals of fairness and equality. The “integrity and sanctity” of the World Cup was invoked, as well as the “neutrality and fairness” of such an event.

Pakistan’s fans may clock, of course, that they had not attracted such concern before the Champions Trophy in 2025, when India had refused to play in Pakistan for what were, in truth, purely political reasons. As it happened, a semifinal and the final of that tournament were eventually moved away from Pakistan, India’s cricketing magnetism pulling the knockouts to Dubai, after the ICC had adopted a “hybrid” model wherein India played all its matches outside the “host” country.

This was a key moment setting cricket on its current trajectory. In return for India’s refusal to play in its home country, Pakistan insisted they would not travel to India for this year’s T20 World Cup – two of the most storied cricketing nations on the planet descending to reciprocal petulance. In the lead-up to this World Cup, Bangladesh was also drawn into the fray, the Indian Premier League (IPL) franchise’s jettisoning of Bangladesh bowler Mustafizur Rahman prompting Bangladesh to demand all its matches be played in Sri Lanka (India’s co-host for this tournament), and that demand, in turn, leading to it being thrown out entirely.

All claims that any of these boycotts are founded on security concerns are, in fact, bogus; security assessments ordered by the ICC had found India sufficiently equipped to handle Bangladesh’s visit, while Pakistan had hosted ICC-sanctioned international cricket involving multiple touring teams, and Pakistan had played an entire One Day International (ODI) World Cup in India as recently as 2023.

What is also clear, however, is that the ICC has now allowed its sport to become the medium through which South Asian states, currently as riven as they have been for decades, exchange geopolitical blows. What’s more, the ICC has begun to favour one set of geopolitical ambitions over others, India never so much as copping a censure for its refusal to play in Pakistan, while India’s men’s team’s refusal to shake hands with the Pakistan players in last year’s Asia Cup has now been adopted across the Board of Cricket in Control’s (BCCI’s) teams – the women’s and Under-19 (U19) sides following suit. To take the ICC at face value would also require believing that ICC Chair Jay Shah is conducting his business in complete separation from Amit Shah, who is India’s home minister.

It is India’s stupendous cricket economy that has chiefly brought about this imbalance. Since 2014, when a Big Three (India, Australia, England) takeover at the ICC diverted cricket to a hypercapitalist path, the game’s top administrators have been adamant that it is profits that must define cricket’s contours. Because India is the wellspring of much of the game’s finances, the ICC has organised for the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to receive close to 40 percent of the ICC’s net earnings, while international men’s cricket largely surrenders a fifth of the calendar to the IPL. The sport’s high-octane driver of financial growth demands protection, or so the official line goes. If member boards fail to align with the BCCI agenda at the ICC, it has long been taken as read that the BCCI may threaten to cancel India’s next tour of that country, which in turn may shatter the smaller board’s revenues. The vote to issue that ultimatum to the BCB had run 14-2 against Bangladesh. A board must never forget at whose table it eats.

A cricket world that has spent 12 years lionising economic might cannot now be surprised that politics has now begun to overrun even the game’s financial imperatives. That monopolies tend to lead to appalling contractions in consumer choice has been a fundamental tenet of economics for generations. Hundreds of millions of Bangladesh fans are about to discover this over the next few weeks, as will the remainder of the cricketing world on February 15, when India and Pakistan were due to play. That profit-driven systems, which equate wealth with power, frequently lose the means to check the most powerful, is another longstanding principle in political economics.

The tournament’s competitive standards will also undoubtedly slip for Bangladesh’s absence. Bangladesh have a body of work in cricket that, respectfully, utterly dwarfs that of Scotland, who have replaced them. There are warnings here, too, for other cricketing economies. Although broadcast revenues from Bangladesh are a mere sliver of the mountains India presently generates, macroeconomic indicators from Bangladesh (a growing population, an improving gross domestic product (GDP) per capita and Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI) ranking) suggest that market is set to grow in future decades. If the ICC is willing to freeze a Full Member with Bangladesh’s potential, what will it do to more vulnerable boards – Sri Lanka, New Zealand, and the West Indies, for example?

The irony for many boards is that they have largely served the BCCI’s agenda at the ICC for a dozen years, helping extend its financial dominance. Since the Big Three first carved up governance and finances at the ICC in 2014, most smaller boards have been enthusiastic supporters of the BCCI’s programme, believing that only by appeasing India can they survive, which in itself is a tacit admission of a galling lack of ambition. And still, a dozen years of carrying this water has delivered them to no less bleak a position. In fact, several of the smaller Full Members have regressed..

Sri Lanka Cricket, for instance, has in recent years been among the BCCI’s most loyal allies. But it has now been a dozen years since any of their senior teams made the semifinal of a global tournament. Their Test cricket survives, but barely – the schedule is increasingly thin. Sri Lanka men only have six Tests on their slate in 2026, having had as few as four Tests to play last year. Cricket West Indies, meanwhile, has not seen a major resurgence on the field either, their men’s T20 fortunes having subsided since 2016, while both their men’s and women’s ODI teams have failed to qualify for the most recent World Cups. Zimbabwe Cricket is in no less challenging a footing now than it was two decades ago.

New Zealand and South Africa have held their own on the field, especially in women’s cricket and in the Test format. But to get here, Cricket South Africa (CSA), in particular, has had to be publicly chastened by the BCCI – in 2013, when India shortened a tour there because the BCCI resented the appointment of a CEO it didn’t like. More recently, South Africa’s top T20 league has also failed to feature Pakistan players, because each of the SA20’s franchise owners has a base in India. Excluding sportspeople based on the circumstances of their birth cuts hard against the ethos of post-Apartheid sport in South Africa. And yet even this national ambition has been subjugated by Indian political interests. Smaller boards have become so reliant on funds flowing from India that India increasingly chooses the terms of their cricketing survival.

Now, a World Cup is about to begin with Bangladesh having learned the harshest lesson of all. The BCB had been among the first of the smaller boards to sign away power to the Big Three during the first takeover in 2014. In 2026, the BCB now finds itself deeply out of favour for non-cricketing reasons.

India is inarguably the greatest cricketing superpower there ever has been. Even in the days of the Imperial Cricket Conference (the ICC’s predecessor), Australia and England could perhaps be relied on to check each other’s most predatory instincts. Such checks do not hold when one board is the sun, and the remainder are merely planets in its orbit. Perhaps the lesson for CA and the ECB – the BCCI’s most eager collaborators – is that the time may be coming when India has decided they are past their use-by date too. Why shouldn’t the BCCI freeze them out eventually? Would India not merely be doing what all superpowers tend to do, which is to leverage its stupendous power until all others either conform or are cast off? And why should the BCCI’s ambitions fall short of gobbling up even those established markets?

Cricket is now making clear its allegiances, and despite the ICC’s rhetoric, its commitments are no longer to neutrality and competitive equilibrium which are such vital rudiments of any sport. Other boards have allowed India’s will to prevail to such an extent that its motives now need not be merely economic; they can be nakedly political. And cricket is being eaten alive in this dark intersection between money and politics.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

An array of political parties and alliances will be vying for seats in the Bangladesh Parliament on February 12 in the country’s first election since the ousting of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in 2024. About 127 million registered voters are eligible to cast votes to elect 350 members of the Jatiya Sangsad, the country’s parliament.

The South Asian country has been in the hands of a caretaker government led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus since August 2024, when a student-led uprising ended Hasina’s long rule. Hasina ordered troops to crack down on protesters, killing 1,400 people. She has since been sentenced to death by a special tribunal in Bangladesh for the brutal crackdown, but remains in exile in India, and her Awami League party has been banned from political activity.

Besides the election on February 12, Bangladesh will also hold a referendum on the July National Charter 2025 – a document drafted following the student protests, setting the foundation for future governance of the country.

The two biggest groups competing for parliamentary seats across the country’s 300 constituencies are the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which is leading a coalition of 10 parties, and Jamaat-e-Islami (JIB), which heads an 11-party alliance, including the National Citizen Party, a group formed by students who led the anti-Hasina movement in 2024. The Awami League, which dominated Bangladeshi politics for decades, has been barred from fielding candidates.

Besides the two main blocs, the Islami Andolan Bangladesh, which broke away from the JIB-led alliance, and the Jatiya Party, a longtime ally of Hasina’s Awami League, are contesting independently.

Here is a look at the main political parties and their leaders vying for parliament seats this year, and the key players influencing the election.

Bangladesh Nationalist Party

Led by Tarique Rahman, the son of the late former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, the BNP is seen as one of the main contenders in the upcoming elections.

The party was founded in 1978 by Ziaur Rahman, Tarique’s father and one of the leading military figures of the country’s independence war against Pakistan in 1971, on the principles of Bangladeshi nationalism. According to the BNP website, this is an “ideology that recognises the right of Bangladeshis from all walks of life, irrespective of their ethnicity, gender or race”.

As a centre-right political party, the BNP has been a popular political force in the country for decades and has traditionally exchanged power with the Awami League.

For four decades after Ziaur Rahman’s assassination in 1981, his wife and Tarique’s father, Khaleda Zia, led the party. Khaleda served as the country’s first female prime minister from 1991 to 1996 and again from 2001 to 2006. In that period, Jamaat was an ally of the BNP as they together fought against Hasina’s Awami League.

After Hasina came back to power in 2009 – she had also ruled between 1996 and 2001 –  the BNP faced the wrath of her government over corruption charges, and Khaleda was put under house arrest in 2018 in two related cases. She was acquitted of all charges after Hasina’s departure in 2024.

Since Hasina’s ousting in 2024, the BNP has risen again as a political frontrunner. A December survey by the United States-based International Republican Institute indicated the BNP had the support of 33 percent of respondents. That was also the only month when the BNP — seeking to position itself as a liberal force ahead of the elections — broke its alliance with Jamaat. Polls show Jamaat just marginally behind the BNP in popular support.

Tarique, 60, had been living in London, United Kingdom, since he fled Bangladesh in 2008 over what he called politically motivated persecution. He arrived in Dhaka on December 25, 2025 to take over the BNP leadership ahead of his mother Khaleda’s death on December 30.

“We will build a Bangladesh that a mother dreams of,” he said in December after returning to the country and calling on citizens from the hills and plains – Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists and Christians – to join him in creating a secure and inclusive nation.

In election rallies, he has pledged to improve the country’s infrastructure, among other promises.

“If elected, the healthcare system will be improved, a flyover will be constructed in Sherpur, permanent embankments will be built in the river erosion areas of Dhunat, and the youth will be made self-reliant through the establishment of IT education institutions,” he said.

According to Khandakar Tahmid Rejwan, lecturer in global studies and governance at the Independent University, Bangladesh, since Rahman’s return, the BNP has become more organised.

“The party has basically revived with a newfound spirit in both its central and grassroots-level leadership,” he said.

“Typical objections against BNP and affiliated party activists, like [allegations of] extortion … have also significantly declined. Top leaders of the central committee have also been comparatively cautious to avoid any statement that might create popular outrage. Significantly, the people are flocking in thousands to hear from Rahman at his electoral rally, even late at midnight,” he said.

Rejwan added that it is widely believed that Rahman is the only man who can currently unite Bangladesh with an “inclusive vision”, unlike his Jamaat rivals, who have failed to address any clear stance or acknowledge what are seen by many as their restrictive policies towards women and religious minorities.

Jamaat-e-Islami

The party was founded in 1941 by Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi during British rule in India.

In 1971, during Bangladesh’s war of independence, Jamaat supported staying with Pakistan, and was banned after the country won its freedom.

But in 1979, four years after the assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who had fought for Bangladesh’s independence and is seen by many as the country’s founding father, BNP founder Ziaur Rahman, who was the country’s president at the time, lifted the ban. Ziaur Rahman was also assassinated in 1981.

Over the next two decades, Jamaat developed into a significant political force. It supported the BNP-led coalition in 1991 and 2001.

But while Hasina was in power from 2009 until she was toppled in student-led protests in 2024 and fled to India, five top Jamaat leaders were executed, while others were jailed for crimes committed during the independence war of 1971. The party was barred in 2013 from running in elections.

In June 2025, the country’s Supreme Court restored the party’s registration, paving the way for its participation in elections.

While Jamaat no longer has an alliance with the BNP, its current leader, 67-year-old Shafiqur Rahman, has also focused on reorganising the party into a strong contender in the election.

Speaking at an election rally in Jamalpur city on Sunday, Shafiqur Rahman said the upcoming election “will be a turning point”.

“It is an election to end the cries of the families of martyrs. It is an election to bury the rotten politics of the past,” he said, according to The Daily Star newspaper.

But his party’s resurgence has also prompted debate over whether Bangladesh is prepared to be led by an Islamist force, which some fear could seek to enforce Islamic law or try to restrict women’s rights and freedoms.

However, Jamaat has rejected such fears and has told reporters it is focusing on expanding its electoral power. Last December, the party announced an alliance with the National Citizen Party, founded by 2024 leaders of the student-led uprising, and with the Liberal Democratic Party, led by 1971 war hero Oli Ahmad.

For the first time in its history, Jamaat is also fielding a Hindu candidate, Krishna Nandi, from Khulna, in a bid to attract non-Muslim voters.

The International Republican Institute survey suggested the Jamaat-led alliance at number two, with 29 percent, closely behind the BNP.

According to Independent University’s Rejwan, Jamaat has an appeal across Bangladesh’s social classes.

“Its student wing has literally outperformed any other political rivals in the university union elections. We are also seeing the Jamaat-affiliated women’s wing reaching out door-to-door in both rural and urban areas to expand their women’s base of voters. Moreover, since the fall of Hasina, we are seeing pro-Jamaat active and retired elites from security forces, university academics, and civil services constantly pushing the pro-Jamaat narratives within their respective capacities,” he said.

“Jamaat’s upper hand and pragmatic postures are now being extended to its allies, like NCP, which is explicitly reaping all the benefits of its senior partner in the alliance,” he added.

National Citizens Party (NCP)

The NCP, one of Jamaat’s allies, was formed in February 2025 by students who led the mass protests in July 2024 over government job quotas, which ultimately toppled Hasina’s government.

Seeking to stand for the 2026 elections, the leaders told a rally in February 2025 that they had formed the party “to uphold the spirit of the July movement among students”.

Led by Nahid Islam, 27, the stated ideals of the NCP are to ensure “governance without corruption” and to unite the country. The party says it aims to uphold freedom of the press, increase women’s representation in parliament and improve Bangladesh’s relations with neighbouring countries, such as India.

But lacking adequate funds to run by itself in an election, the party has allied with Jamaat. However, the move has been received poorly by some in Bangladesh. It also triggered some resignations by some NCP members over ideological differences.

According to local media reports, those members submitted a memorandum stating that Jamaat’s controversial political history and historical views against Bangladesh’s independence in 1971 were contrary to the NCP’s values.

In an interview with ABC News last month, Nahid Islam defended the decision to unite with Jamaat and said, “When we are forming an electoral alliance, we are not abandoning our own political beliefs. It’s just a strategic alliance.”

“It’s unfortunate to see the leader of the political party that arguably claims to own and lead the 2024 mass uprising and depose Hasina, now become a junior partner to a major political party,” Rejwan said.

“As a result, we see defections of many top leaders of NCP, and astonishingly, by allying, it was only able to bargain for 30 seats for its own candidate. To sum up, Nahid has sold his political autonomy and image of an exclusive figure by de facto becoming subservient to Jamaat,” he added.

Who are the other key players in the election?

Besides the main political parties, Muhammad Yunus, who currently leads the interim government, and General Waker-Uz-Zaman, the army chief, are also influential figures in this election.

Yunus, who was selected to run the government after Hasina’s ousting, is facilitating the election in his capacity as the country’s chief adviser.

But while political parties are campaigning for the election, Yunus is focusing on the referendum on the July Charter, which will take place on the same day.

After Hasina’s ousting, Yunus formed the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) in 2025, seeking to amend the governance of the country. The commission proposed an anticorruption mechanism, electoral reforms and new rules the police must follow, among other issues. The July Charter is the culmination of the CRC’s work and takes its name from the protests which dismantled Hasina’s government in July 2024. Bangladeshis will vote to approve or reject it in the referendum.

Last month, Yunus expressed confidence in the results of the referendum and told the media he expected people and political parties to agree to the charter. But some critics have said holding the referendum and establishing the charter is not constitutional.

General Zaman is also a key player in the election.

Following the 1975 assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Bangladesh’s founding leader and then-president, the country entered a period marked by coups, countercoups and military rule, which reshaped the state.

Currently, the army is not vying for electoral power, but its focus will be on ensuring public order and security during the election, in light of political violence that has spread in the country since the upheaval of 2024.

The military also plays a role with respect to backing the political party in power or deciding how to govern the country during a political crisis.

In September 2024, after the protests against Hasina, Zaman told the Reuters news agency that he would back Yunus’s interim government “come what may”, while also floating a timeline for elections within 18 months, placing him central to the political debate.

A successful election will require goodwill from both Yunus and the army chief, according to Rejwan.

“Executives under the leadership of Yunus are critical to ensure the nationwide voting, while the Chief of Army Staff Waker’s forces, which would be deployed throughout the country, are indispensable to maintain public order and prevent the proliferation of political instability, violence and chaos,” he said.

Does Hasina have any power at all?

Hasina, who is currently in exile in India, has denounced the upcoming elections since her party, the Awami League, has not been allowed to take part. However, those who voted for her in the past must now choose how to vote this time.

In a message sent to the media last month, Hasina stated that “a government born of exclusion cannot unite a divided nation”.

“Each time political participation is denied to a significant portion of the population, it deepens resentment, delegitimises institutions and creates the conditions for future instability,” the former leader warned in an email to The Associated Press news agency.

Bangladesh’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it was “surprised and shocked” that Hasina had been allowed to make a public address in India. Her speeches and statements are banned from the media in Bangladesh.

“Allowing the event to take place in the Indian capital and letting mass murderer Hasina openly deliver her hate speech … constitute a clear affront to the people and the Government of Bangladesh,” the ministry said in a statement.

Hasina was sentenced to death in absentia by a tribunal in Bangladesh last November, and Dhaka has called on New Delhi to extradite her.

But she remains in India, and Rejwan says she will be a key political instigator of unrest as the elections approach.

“If Hasina were a negligible figure, then the interim government wouldn’t have banned all of her speeches and statements from being aired on television or printed in newspapers … the interim government would also not have reacted so firmly against India for allowing her to speak,” he noted.

“This means Hasina is a factor that the interim government implicitly believes has an influence over the Awami League populace, who are yet undecided on whom to cast their vote for, given that AL is banned from the polls,” he said.

“The reality is that AL has its own clear political ideology and a base of loyal cadres, many of whom have declined to change their allegiance despite living a harsh clandestine life in Bangladesh or abroad,” he added.

Authorities say that steps are being taken to contain the virus and that risk of a global spread of the virus remains low.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has said that a patient in Bangladesh died after contracting the Nipah virus, adding that it believes the risk of the disease spreading internationally still remains low.

The WHO said on Friday that a patient died after being admitted to hospital on January 28, where a team collected throat swabs and blood samples. Infection with the virus was laboratory-confirmed the following day.

“On 3 February 2026, the International Health Regulations National Focal Point (IHR NFP) for Bangladesh notified WHO of one confirmed case of Nipah virus (NiV) infection in Rajshahi Division,” the international health organisation said in a statement.

The announcement comes about a week after two cases were confirmed in West Bengal state in eastern India, as authorities work to contain the deadly virus that they say remains largely under control.

An outbreak of the Nipah virus in India’s West Bengal has heightened concerns in China and several Southeast Asian nations, prompting tighter health screening operations at airports, though the WHO said it does not recommend any travel or trade restrictions based on current information.

“WHO assesses the overall public health risk posed by NiV to be low at the national, the regional and global level,” an assessment reads.

“The risk of international disease spread is considered low,” it said.

The WHO said that the patient in Bangladesh, described as a female between the ages of 40 and 50 residing in the Naogaon district, first began experiencing fever and neurological symptoms on January 21. The patient reported no travel history but had recently consumed raw date palm sap.

An additional 35 contact persons have been tested for the virus, with no further cases yet detected.

About 348 Nipah virus cases have been reported in Bangladesh since 2001, about half of which occurred among people with a confirmed history of drinking raw palm sap.

Outbreaks tend to occur on a seasonal basis from the months of December through April, which the WHO says corresponds with the harvest and consumption of date palm sap.

There are currently no licensed medicines or vaccines specific for the infection, and the fatality rate is reported to be high, between 40 percent and 75 percent, among people infected with the virus, according to reports.

In a statement last week, WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus called Nipah a “rare but serious disease” that authorities are working to counter.

“Authorities have increased disease surveillance and testing, implemented prevention and control measures in health care settings, and are keeping the public informed about how to protect themselves,” Ghebreyesus said.

Harshit Rana sustained the knee injury in a warm-up match against South Africa with Mohammed Siraj now taking his place.

India seam bowler Harshit Rana has been ruled out of the Twenty20 World Cup with a knee injury, India’s cricket board (BCCI) announced on Friday, with Mohammed Siraj named as a replacement.

Rana, who has also ⁠developed into a handy lower-order batter, sustained the injury during a warmup match against South Africa on Wednesday when he bowled just one over before leaving the field.

Skipper Suryakumar Yadav had said that Rana’s injury did not look good, but that they had enough depth ⁠in the squad to deal with it.

Jasprit Bumrah and Arshdeep Singh are likely to share the new-ball duty, while India also have seam-bowling all-rounders in Hardik Pandya and Shivam Dube.

“It’s a big blow obviously because you make a squad of 15 players with a lot of combinations in mind,” Suryakumar said before ‌Saturday’s Group A contest against the United States.

“If he is not available for us going forward, then we will set other combinations. We have enough ‌players.”

The International Cricket Council said they had approved Siraj as a replacement for Rana.

India are ‌bidding to be the first team ⁠in the tournament’s history to successfully defend their title and also be the first host to win a T20 World Cup.

India’s revised squad

Suryakumar Yadav (captain), Abhishek Sharma, Sanju ‌Samson (wicketkeeper), Ishan Kishan (wicketkeeper), Tilak Varma, Hardik Pandya, Shivam Dube, Axar Patel (vice-captain), Rinku Singh, Jasprit Bumrah, Arshdeep Singh, Kuldeep Yadav, Varun Chakaravarthy, Washington Sundar, Mohammed Siraj

A suicide bomb attack during Friday prayers at a Shia mosque in Pakistan’s capital Islamabad has killed dozens of people and injured at least 170 others.

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

Rescue teams reach the site after blast reported at a mosque in Tarlai Kalan during Friday prayers.

At least 15 people have been killed and more than 80 wounded after a blast at a Shia mosque in Pakistan’s capital Islamabad, local officials say.

The explosion occurred at Khadija Tul Kubra mosque, in southeastern Islamabad’s Tarlai Kalan area, during Friday prayers.

Rescue teams have reached the site of the explosion.

At least 15 of those injured were taken to hospitals with some of them in critical condition, rescue official Mohamed Amir said, according to dpa news agency.

Islamabad police spokesperson Taqi Jawad said the cause of the blast has yet to be determined, local news outlet Dawn reported.

In November last year, a suicide bomber blew himself up at the entrance of the Islamabad District Judicial Complex, killing at least 12 people and wounding dozens.

Al Jazeera’s Abid Hussain contributed to this report.

Explosion took place at an unregulated mine in the northeastern East Jainta Hills area.

An explosion at an illicit coal mine in northeast India has killed at least 18 people, according to local authorities.

Police on Thursday said they had pulled 18 bodies from the blast site, located in a remote part of East Jainta Hills district.

Eight others were wounded in the incident, said local official Manish Kumar. It is unclear how many workers were at the site during the explosion; others may still be trapped, said police.

Kumar said rescuers paused operations at sundown Thursday and planned to resume Friday with support from state and federal personnel. He described the site as an “illegal rat-hole mine”, referring to a deep, narrow shaft where workers risk hazardous conditions to extract coal and other minerals.

District police chief Vikash Kumar said dynamite likely triggered the blast, but investigations were ongoing.

“It is likely that the workers died either from burn injuries or breathing issues because of the release of noxious fumes,” said Kumar in a statement carried by The Indian Express. “But because there is no one who has come out in a condition to tell us exactly what happened and how many workers were there in total, we do not have an estimation of how many more may be trapped.”

Prime Minister Modi announces compensation

Conrad Sangma, chief minister of the Indian state of Meghalaya, where the incident occurred, pledged that authorities would hold those responsible accountable and urged against illegal mining.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi expressed “condolences” to the families of the deceased workers and announced a 200,000 rupees ($2,216) compensation package for each family. “Pained by the mishap in East Jaintia Hills, Meghalaya,” his office wrote in a post on X.

Unregulated coal pits are common in India’s east and northeast regions, with workers earning between $18 to $24 for a day-long shift.

Back in 2018, at least 15 miners were killed while trapped in one such mine in Meghalaya state.

Rat-hole mining has been banned in Meghalaya since 2014 due to water pollution concerns.

‘There should be no politics in sport,’ Sharif said while referencing to the recent India-Bangladesh cricket crisis.

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has confirmed the decision to boycott the ICC Men’s Twenty20 World Cup match by Pakistan against India, saying the move is a show of solidarity with Bangladesh.

“We have taken this stand after careful deliberation and [decided that] on this matter, we must stand with Bangladesh and support them,” Sharif told his cabinet on Wednesday.

On Sunday, the Pakistani government announced that its men’s cricket team will not take the field in the match against archrivals India on February 15, without stating the reason behind the decision at the time.

However, it was largely believed to be a mark of protest against Bangladesh’s ouster from the tournament for refusing to travel to India for their T20 World Cup fixtures.

Sharif’s statement, made in a televised address, rubber-stamped the motive and confirmed the boycott.

“We have taken a very clear stand that we will not play the match against India,” Sharif told the government officials. “Pakistan believes that this is sport, not politics, and there should be no politics in sport.”

While Sharif did not elaborate on his statement, it points towards the ongoing cricket crisis surrounding the tournament, which began after a Bangladeshi player was expelled from the Indian Premier League on the directives of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) last month.

Mustafizur Rahman’s removal was linked to political tensions between Bangladesh and India, as confirmed by BCCI Secretary Devajit Saikia, and led to a chain of events, including the boycott by Pakistan.

India and Pakistan are placed in the same group and were scheduled to meet in a marquee clash in Sri Lanka, which is cohosting the tournament along with India.

Following Pakistan’s announcement, the International Cricket Council (ICC) said in a statement that “selective participation undermines the spirit and sanctity of the competitions”.

“While the ICC respects the roles of governments in matters of national policy, this decision is not in the interest of the global game or the welfare of fans worldwide, including millions in Pakistan,” it said, adding that it awaited official communication from the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB).

“The ICC hopes that the PCB will consider the significant and long-term implications for cricket in its own country as this is likely to impact the global cricket ecosystem, which it is itself a member and beneficiary of.”

While the boycott by Pakistan could see them forfeit two points, it remains unclear if the PCB will be hit by further sanctions or bans.

The T20 World Cup begins on Saturday.

New Delhi, India – When US President Donald Trump announced a trade deal with India on Monday this week, he declared that New Delhi would pivot away from Russian energy as part of the agreement.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Trump said, had promised to stop buying Russian oil, and instead buy crude from the United States and from Venezuela, whose president, Nicolas Maduro, was abducted by US special forces in early January. Since then, the US has effectively taken control of Venezuela’s mammoth oil industry.

In return, Trump dialled down trade tariffs on Indian goods from an overall 50 percent to just 18 percent. Half of that 50 percent tariff was levied last year as punishment for India buying Russian oil, which the White House maintains is financing Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine.

But since Monday, India has not publicly confirmed that it has committed to either ceasing its purchase of Russian oil or embracing Venezuelan crude, analysts note. Dmitry Peskov, a Kremlin spokesperson, told reporters on Tuesday that Russia had received no indication of this from India, either.

And switching from Russian to Venezuelan oil will be far from straightforward. A cocktail of other factors – shocks to the energy market, costs, geography, and the characteristics of different kinds of oil – will complicate New Delhi’s decisions about its sourcing of oil, they say.

So, can India really dump Russian oil? And can Venezuelan crude replace it?

What is Trump’s plan?

Trump has been pressuring India to stop buying Russian oil for months. After Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, the US and European Union placed an oil price cap on Russian crude in a bid to limit Russia’s ability to finance the war.

As a result, other countries including India began buying large quantities of cheap Russian oil. India, which before the war sourced only 2.5 percent of its oil from Russia, became the second-largest consumer of Russian oil after China. It currently sources around 30 percent of its oil from Russia.

Last year, Trump doubled trade tariffs on Indian goods from 25 percent to 50 percent as punishment for this. Later in the year, Trump also imposed sanctions on Russia’s two biggest oil companies – and threatened secondary sanctions against countries and entities that trade with these firms.

Since the abduction of Maduro by US forces in early January, Trump has effectively taken over the Venezuelan oil sector, controlling sales cash flows.

Venezuela also has the largest proven oil reserves in the world, estimated at 303 billion barrels, more than five times larger than those of the US, the world’s largest oil producer.

But while getting India to buy Venezuelan oil makes sense from the US’s perspective, analysts say this could be operationally messy.

How much oil does India import from Russia?

India currently imports nearly 1.1 million barrels per day (bpd) of Russian crude, according to analytics company Kpler. Under Trump’s mounting pressure, that is lower than the average 1.21 million bpd in December 2025 and more than 2 million bpd in mid-2025.

One barrel is equivalent to 159 litres (42 gallons) of crude oil. Once refined, a barrel typically produces about 73 litres (19 gallons) of petrol for a car. Oil is also refined to produce a wide variety of products, from jet fuel to household items including plastics and even lotions.

Has India stopped Russian oil purchases?

India has reduced the amount of oil it buys from Russia over the past year, but it has not stopped buying it altogether.

Under increasing pressure from Trump, last August, Indian officials called out the “hypocrisy” of the US and EU pressuring New Delhi to back off from Russian crude.

“In fact, India began importing from Russia because traditional supplies were diverted to Europe after the outbreak of the conflict,” Randhir Jaiswal, India’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, said then. He added that India’s decision to import Russian oil was “meant to ensure predictable and affordable energy costs to the Indian consumer”.

Despite this, Indian refiners, currently the second-largest group of buyers of Russian oil after China, are reportedly winding up their purchases after clearing current scheduled orders.

Major refiners like Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL), Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd (MRPL), and HPCL-Mittal Energy Ltd (HMEL) halted purchasing from Russia following the US sanctions against Russian oil producers last year.

Other players like Indian Oil Corporation (IOC), Bharat Petroleum Corporation, and Reliance Industries will soon stop their purchases.

What happens if India suddenly stops buying Russian oil?

Even if India wanted to stop importing Russian oil altogether, analysts argue it would be extremely costly to do so.

In September last year, India’s oil and petroleum minister, Hardeep Singh Puri, told reporters that it would also sharply push up energy prices and fuel inflation. “The world will face serious consequences if the supplies are disrupted. The world can’t afford to keep Russia off the oil market,” Puri said.

Analysts tend to agree. “A complete cessation of Indian purchases of Russian oil would be a major disruption. An immediate halt would spike global prices and threaten India’s economic growth,” said George Voloshin, an independent energy analyst based in Paris.

Russian oil would likely be diverted more heavily towards China and into “shadow” fleets of tankers that deliver sanctioned oil secretly by flying false flags and switching off location equipment, Voloshin told Al Jazeera. “Mainstream tanker demand would shift toward the Atlantic Basin, most likely increasing global freight rates as a result,” he noted.

Sumit Pokharna, vice president at Kotak Securities, noted that Indian refineries have reported robust margins in the last two years, majorly benefitting from the discounted Russian crude.

“If they move to higher-costing, like the US or Venezuela, then raw material cost would increase, and that would squeeze their margins,” he told Al Jazeera. “If it goes beyond control, they may have to pass the excess onto consumers.”

Can India stop buying Russian oil altogether?

It may not be able to. One of India’s two private refiners, Nayara Energy, is majority-Russian-owned and under heavy Western sanctions. The Russian energy firm Rosneft holds a 49.13 percent stake in the company, which operates a 400,000-barrel-per-day refinery in India’s Gujarat, PM Modi’s home state.

Nayara is the second-largest importer of Russian crude, buying about 471,000 barrels per day in January this year, accounting for nearly 40 percent of Russian supplies to India.

Its plant has relied solely on Russian crude since European Union sanctions were imposed on the company last July.

Nayara is not planning to load Russian oil in April as it shuts its refinery for more than a month for maintenance from April 10, according to Reuters.

Pokharna said the future of Nayara hangs in the balance, with the US unlikely to grant India an overt exemption for the Russia-backed company to import crude.

Can India switch to Venezuelan oil?

India has been a major consumer of Venezuelan oil in the past. At its peak, in 2019, India imported $7.2bn of oil, accounting for just under 7 percent of total imports. That stopped after the US slapped sanctions on Venezuelan oil, but some officials of the government-owned Oil and Natural Gas Corporation are still stationed in the Latin American country.

Now, major Indian refiners have said they are open to receiving Venezuelan oil again, but only if it is a viable option.

For one thing, Venezuela is roughly twice as far from India as Russia and five times further than the Middle East, meaning much higher freight costs.

Venezuelan oil is more expensive as well. “Russian Urals [a medium-heavy crude blend] has been trading at a wide-ranging discount of about $10-20 per barrel to Brent, while Venezuelan Merey currently offers a smaller discount of around $5-8 per barrel,” Voloshin told Al Jazeera.

“Importing from Venezuela and forgoing the Russian discount would be a costly affair for India,” said Pokharna. “From transportation cost to forgoing discounts, it could cost India $6-8 more per barrel – and that is a huge increase in the importing bill.”

Overall, a complete pivot away from Russia could raise India’s import bill by $9bn to $11bn – an amount roughly equal to India’s federal health budget – per year, according to Kpler.

“Venezuelan crude must be discounted by at least $10 to $12 per barrel to be competitive,” argued Voloshin. “This deeper discount is necessary to offset the much higher freight costs, increased insurance premiums for the longer Atlantic voyage, and the somewhat higher operational expenses required to process Venezuela’s extra-heavy high-sulfur crude.”

Without deeper discounts, the longer journey and complex handling make Venezuelan oil more expensive on a delivered basis, he added.

Another major issue is that many Indian refiners simply do not have the facilities to process very heavy Venezuelan oil.

Venezuelan crude is a heavy, sour oil, thick and viscous like molasses, with a high sulphur content requiring complex, specialised refineries to process it into fuel. Only a small number of Indian refineries are equipped to handle it.

“[Venezuelan oil’s heaviness] makes it an option only for complex refineries, leaving out older and smaller refineries,” Pokharna told Al Jazeera. “The shift is operationally difficult and would require blending with more expensive light crudes.”

Then there is the question of availability. Today, Venezuela produces barely a million barrels per day when pushed to its limit. Even if all production was sent to India, it would not match the total Russian oil import.

Where else could India buy oil?

India’s Minister Puri has said that New Delhi is looking to diversify sourcing options from nearly 40 countries.

As India has reduced Russian imports, it has increased them from Middle Eastern nations and other countries in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Now, while Russia accounts for nearly 27 percent share in India’s oil imports, OPEC nations, led by Iraq and Saudi Arabia, contribute 53 percent.

Reeling from Trump’s trade war, India has also increased purchases of US oil. American crude imports to India rose by 92 percent from April to November in 2025 to nearly 13 million tons, compared to 7.1 million in the same period in 2024.

However, India would be competing for these supplies with the European Union, which has pledged to spend $750bn by 2028 on US energy and nuclear products.

Meanwhile, for Venezuela to return to higher production, Caracas needs political stability, changes in foreign investment and oil laws, and to clear debts. That will take time, experts say.

Names of the rich and powerful are littered throughout the latest batch of the “Epstein files.” Here are some of the most prominent global figures.

Leaked audio from the Epstein files suggests former UK prime minister and ‘Board of Peace’ member Tony Blair was known for earning large sums of money for advisory work after leaving office. Blair’s office told Al Jazeera the figures mentioned in the audio were ‘rubbish’.

The tenth edition of the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup will take place in India and Sri Lanka from February 7 to March 8, 2026.

Twenty teams will be competing in 55 matches for the chance to win cricket’s most prestigious T20 trophy.

But cricket is a game with a list of commonly used terms and phrases that might confuse those new to it.

In this illustrated guide, Al Jazeera breaks down cricket lingo and helps you understand the game beloved by nearly two billion people.

What is the aim of the game?

Cricket is a bat-and-ball sport played between two teams consisting of 11 players each.

The game is divided into two parts, known as innings.

In the first innings, following a coin toss, the first team bats while the other team bowls and fields.

The batting team should try to score the highest number of runs in the allotted time, while the bowling team has to try to prevent them from scoring.

The bowling team has dedicated bowlers, while the remaining players, spread across the ground, try to prevent the batters from scoring runs as well as catch the ball to get the batters out.

In the second innings, the bowling team now gets a turn to bat and try to score more runs than their opposition.

The team with the highest number of runs at the end of the day wins the game.

What does T20 mean?

There are three different formats in cricket, each with its own duration and rules.

Each format has its own defined set of “overs”.

An “over” consists of six deliveries by the bowler.

In a T20 match, which usually lasts three to four hours, each team is given 20 overs (120 balls) to score the most number of runs. This format of the game is designed to be shorter and faster-paced, which provides more excitement for spectators.

A One Day International (ODI) match typically lasts about seven to eight hours. Each team is given a total of 300 deliveries, which are divided into 50 overs, to score the most number of runs.

A Test match is the longest and oldest format of the game, played over a maximum of five days. It is considered a test of endurance and skill. Each day has a minimum of 90 overs. Both teams have two innings each.

The cricket field and pitch

Cricket is played in a large, oval-shaped field, typically about 150 metres (164 yards) in diameter at its widest point and surrounded by a boundary rope.

In the centre of the field is the pitch, a rectangular area about 20 metres long (22 yards) and 3 metres (3.3 yards) wide, where most of the action takes place.

At each end of the pitch are three wooden sticks known as wickets or stumps, with two bails atop them.

The batter stands in front of these wickets inside a specified area known as the batting crease. It is from there that he or she will strike the incoming ball from the bowler.

During the match, the batting team will actually have two players on the field, one on either end of the pitch, to take turns in hitting the ball.

The bowling team, meanwhile, will have all 11 players scattered throughout the field to minimise the number of runs their opponents can score.

Some of the most common positions are shown below:

How are runs scored?

The aim for the batters is to score as many runs as possible by hitting the ball in the gaps between the fielders or over the boundary rope.

To score a run, the batter needs to hit the ball and then, together with their batting partner, run to the opposite side of the pitch before the fielder returns the ball; otherwise, they can be run out.

A single run is scored when both batters safely complete one run, a two-run when they complete two runs, and so on.

If a batter hits the ball along the ground and it reaches the boundary rope, then four runs are awarded.

To signal that four runs have been scored, the umpire moves his right hand from one side to the other, repeatedly waving it back and forth horizontally.

The maximum, six runs, is scored when the batter hits the ball directly over the boundary before it bounces. This shot is the most rewarding but also among the riskiest, due to the chances of getting bowled or caught.

To signal a six, the umpire will raise both hands above his head, which the fans will often imitate.

How does a player get ‘out’?

There are several ways to get a batter out, with each out referred to as “losing a wicket”.

Since cricket is played with pairs of batsmen, when 10 players from the batting team are dismissed, their innings concludes, and the sum of the runs they scored sets the target score for the bowling team.

The most common ways of getting a player out include:

Bowled: This happens if the batter misses the ball, and it goes on to hit the wicket.

Caught: A batter is caught out when they hit the ball and a fielder catches it before it touches the ground.

Run-Out: A run-out happens when the fielding team throws the ball at the wicket while the batter is trying to score a run and before they can reach the opposite side of the pitch.

LBW (Leg Before Wicket): This decision depends on various factors, but in a nutshell, a batter can be given out LBW if the ball hits their legs while they are standing in front of the wicket, thus preventing the wicket from being hit.

To signal an “out”, the umpire who is standing in the middle of the field will raise his index finger to signify that a batter has been dismissed.

This gesture is often referred to as the umpire having “raised the finger” or “given the finger”.

How do you read the score?

To follow the score in cricket, you need to look at three numbers.

The first is the number of runs a team has scored – the higher the number, the better.

The second indicates the number of “outs” or “wickets”. Once 10 players are out, their batting innings come to an end.

The third is the number of overs that have been bowled.

Combined, a score may look like this: 109-5 (10 overs)

This means that 109 runs have been scored, 5 players are out, and 10 overs have been completed.

Typically, teams make anywhere from 100 to 250 runs during a T20 match. A score of 100 is considered low to defend, while 250 runs is usually very strong.

The highest score in international T20 cricket was between Zimbabwe and The Gambia in 2024.

Zimbabwe batted first and scored a huge 344-4 in their 20 overs. In response, The Gambia only managed 54 runs before losing all 10 of their wickets.

Zimbabwe won by 290 runs.

The 10th edition of the ICC Men’s Twenty20 World Cup gets under way on February 7, with 20 teams competing for the prize.

Defending champions India will be led by Suryakumar Yadav, who replaced Rohit Sharma as captain after he retired from the T20 format.

The cohosts, alongside England and the West Indies, will be aiming to become the first country to win three T20 World Cup trophies.

Rashid Khan’s Afghanistan will look to emulate their performance from 2024, while Pakistan will hope their journey does not stop at the group stage.

Here are the 20 teams and their squads for the T20 World Cup:

Afghanistan

Rashid Khan (captain), Ibrahim Zadran, Rahmanullah Gurbaz (wicketkeeper), Mohammad Ishaq (wicketkeeper), Sediqullah Atal, Darwish Rasooli, Shahidullah Kamal, Azmatullah Omarzai, Gulbadin Naib, Mohammad Nabi, Noor Ahmad, Mujeeb Ur Rahman, Zia Ur Rahman Sharifi, Fazalhaq Farooqi, Abdullah Ahmadzai

Australia

Mitchell Marsh (captain), Xavier Bartlett, Cooper Connolly, Pat Cummins, Tim David, ‍Cameron Green, Nathan Ellis, Josh Hazlewood, Travis Head, Josh Inglis (wicketkeeper), Matthew Kuhnemann, Glenn Maxwell, Matthew Short, Marcus Stoinis, Adam Zampa

Canada

Dilpreet Bajwa (captain), Navneet Dhaliwal, Shreyas Movva (wicketkeeper), Ravinderpal Singh, Yuvraj Samra, Kanwarpal Tathgur, Ajayveer Hundal, Nicholas Kirton, Saad Bin Zafar, Shivam Sharma, Harsh Thaker, Dilon Heyliger, Kaleem Sana, Ansh Patel, Manjot Buttar

England

Harry Brook (captain), Rehan Ahmed, Jofra Archer, Tom Banton, Jacob Bethell, Jos Buttler (wicketkeeper), Sam Curran, Liam Dawson, Ben Duckett, Will Jacks, Jamie Overton, Adil Rashid, Phil Salt (captain), Josh Tongue, Luke Wood

India

Suryakumar Yadav (captain), Abhishek Sharma, Sanju Samson (wicketkeeper), Tilak Varma, Hardik Pandya, Shivam Dube, Axar ‍Patel, Rinku Singh, Jasprit Bumrah, Harshit Rana, Arshdeep Singh, Kuldeep Yadav, Varun Chakaravarthy, Washington Sundar, Ishan Kishan (wicketkeeper)

Ireland

Paul Stirling (captain), Ross Adair, Ben Calitz, Harry Tector, Tim Tector, Lorcan Tucker (wicketkeeper), Mark Adair, Curtis Campher, Gareth Delany, George Dockrell, Matthew Humphreys, Josh Little, Ben White, Barry McCarthy, Craig Young

Italy

Wayne Madsen (captain), Harry Manenti, Jon-Jon Trevor Smuts, Grant Stewart, Ben Manenti, Ali Hasan, Marcus Campopiano, Thomas Draca, Jaspreet Singh, Crishan Kalugamage, Gian-Piero Meade, Anthony Mosca, Justin Mosca, Syed Naqvi, Zain Ali

Namibia

Gerhard Erasmus (captain), Jan Balt, Zane Green (wicketkeeper), Malan Kruger, Dylan Leicher, Louren Steenkamp, Jan Frylinck, Jan Nicol Loftie-Eaton, Willem Myburgh, Johannes Jonathan Smit, Jack Brassell, Max Heingo, Bernard Scholtz, Ben Shikongo, Ruben Trumpelmann

Nepal

Rohit Paudel (captain), Aarif Sheikh, Aasif Sheikh (wicketkeeper), Dipendra Singh Airee, Basir Ahamad, Kushal Bhurtel, Sundeep Jora, Lokesh Bam, Gulshan Jha, Karan KC, Sompal Kami, Sandeep Lamichhane, Sher Malla, Lalit Rajbanshi, Nandan Yadav

Netherlands

Scott Edwards (captain, wicketkeeper), Noah Croes, Michael Levitt, Max O’Dowd, Colin Ackermann, Bas de Leede, Zach Lion-Cachet, Saqib Zulfiqar, Roelof van der Merwe, Aryan Dutt, Fred Klaassen, Kyle Klein, Logan van Beek, Tim van der Gugten, Paul van Meekeren

New Zealand

Mitchell Santner (captain), Finn Allen, Michael Bracewell, Mark Chapman, Devon Conway (wicketkeeper), Jacob Duffy, Lockie Ferguson, Matt Henry, Daryl Mitchell, Adam Milne, James Neesham, Glenn Phillips, Rachin Ravindra, Tim Seifert (wicketkeeper), Ish Sodhi

Oman

Jatinder Singh (captain), Hammad Mirza (wicketkeeper), Vinayak Shukla (wicketkeeper), Jay Odedra, Mohammad Nadeem, Nadeem Khan, Karan Sonavale, Wasim Ali, Hassnain Shah, Jiten Ramanandi, Shafiq Jan, Shah Faisal, Shakeel Ahmed, Sufyan Mehmood, Ashish Odedara

Pakistan

Salman Ali Agha (captain), Abrar Ahmed, Babar Azam, Faheem Ashraf, Fakhar Zaman, Khawaja Nafay (wicketkeeper), Mohammad Nawaz, Salman Mirza, Naseem Shah, Sahibzada Farhan, Saim Ayub, Shaheen Shah Afridi, Shadab Khan, Usman Khan (wicketkeeper), Usman Tariq

Scotland

Richie Berrington (captain), Tom Bruce, Matthew Cross (wicketkeeper), Michael Jones, Finlay McCreath, George Munsey, Michael Leask, Brendon McCullen, Brad Currie, Chris Greaves, Safyaan Sharif, Mark Watt, Brad Wheal, Oliver Davidson, Zainullah Ihsan

South Africa

Aiden Markram (captain), Corbin Bosch, Dewald Brevis, Quinton de Kock (wicketkeeper), Tony de Zorzi, Donovan Ferreira, Marco Jansen, George Linde, Keshav Maharaj, Kwena Maphaka, David Miller, Lungi Ngidi, Anrich Nortje, Kagiso Rabada, Jason Smith

Sri Lanka

Dasun Shanaka (captain), Pathum Nissanka, Kamil Mishara, Kusal Mendis (wicketkeeper), Kusal Janith Perera, Kamindu Mendis, Charith Asalanka, Janith Liyanage, Pavan Rathnayake, Wanindu Hasaranga, Dunith Wellalage, Maheesh Theekshana, Dushmantha Chameera, Matheesha Pathirana, Eshan Malinga

USA

Monank Patel (captain), Jessy Singh, Andries Gous (wicketkeeper), Shehan Jayasuriya, Milind Kumar, Shayan Jahangir, Saiteja Mukkamala, Sanjay Krishnamurthi, Harmeet Singh, Nosthush Kenjige, Shadley van Schalkwyk, Saurabh Netravalkar, Ali Khan, Mohammad Mohsin, Shubham Ranjane

Zimbabwe

Sikandar Raza (captain), Brian Bennett, Ryan Burl, Brendan Taylor (wicketkeeper), Graeme Cremer, Bradley Evans, Clive Madande (wicketkeeper), Tinotenda Maposa, Tadiwanashe Marumani, Wellington Masakadza, Tony Munyonga, Tashinga Musekiwa, Blessing Muzarabani, Dion Myers, Richard Ngarava

New Delhi, India – The latest release of documents related to the US Justice Department investigation into the crimes of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein has set off political infernos around the globe for featuring the names of world leaders.

The tranche of files, which includes more than three million pages of documents, was released on Friday. This is the largest release since US President Donald Trump’s administration passed a law last year to force the release of the documents.

Epstein was convicted in 2008 of sex offences but avoided federal charges – which could have seen him face life in prison – by doing a deal with prosecutors. Instead, he received an 18-month prison sentence, which allowed him to go on “work release” to his office for 12 hours a day, six days a week. He was released on probation after 13 months.

In 2019, he was arrested again on charges including the sex trafficking of minors. But he died by suicide in a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 before his trial could commence.

With this latest disclosure of documents and emails linked to the cases against him, yet more has been revealed about the disgraced financier’s sexual abuse of young girls and his interactions with wealthy and powerful figures from the United Kingdom, Australia, Norway, Slovakia and India.

Simply being named in Epstein documents or emails does not mean a person is guilty of criminal wrongdoing, and, so far, no charges have been brought against individuals named in connection with the sex offender.

However, the new documents show communications between high-profile figures in the US, including Trump, former President Bill Clinton, and business tycoons such as Bill Gates and Elon Musk.

Here is what we know about some of the powerful men (and one woman) from other countries who have featured in these documents.

Narendra Modi, Indian prime minister

Documents released on Friday reveal conversations between Anil Ambani, the billionaire chairman of Reliance Group who is close to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Epstein. All the conversations took place in the years following Epstein’s first conviction for sex offences in 2008.

The two emailed each other about a range of issues, from sizing up incoming US ambassadors to India to setting up meetings for Modi with top US officials.

Ambani is the elder brother of India’s richest man, Mukesh Ambani, who is also close to PM Modi.

On March 16, 2017, two months after Trump was sworn in for his first term as president of the US, Ambani sent an iMessage to Epstein, saying “Leadership” was asking for his help to connect with senior figures in Trump’s circle, including Jared Kushner and Steve Bannon.

Ambani also asked for advice from Epstein about a possible visit by Modi to meet Trump “in may (sic)”, before setting up a call in the messages.

In another iMessage exchange two weeks later, on March 29, Epstein wrote to Ambani: “Discussions re israel strategy dominating modi dates (sic).” Two days later, Ambani informed Epstein that Modi would visit Israel in July and asked the disgraced financier: “who do u know fir track 2”.

On June 26, Modi met Trump in Washington on his first visit since Trump became president.

Then, on July 6, 2017, Modi became the first-ever Indian prime minister to visit Israel. He snubbed the Palestinian Authority, prompting condemnation from Palestinian officials.

That year, New Delhi became the largest buyer of Israeli weapons, amounting to $715m worth of purchases. The defence partnership between the two countries has since continued despite Israel’s genocidal war in Gaza.

This marked a sharp change from India’s history of advocating for the Palestinian cause. It only opened up formal diplomatic ties with Israel in 1992. Before that, Indian citizens had been barred by India from travelling to Israel since the country’s creation in 1948.

After Modi’s visit on July 6, Epstein emailed an unidentified individual he referred to as “Jabor Y”, saying: “The Indian Prime minister modi took advice. and danced and sang in israel for the benefit of the US president. they had met a few weeks ago.. IT WORKED. !”

Ambani Reliance Defence Ltd also entered a joint venture with an Israeli state defence group last year in a deal valued at $10bn over a decade.

Shortly after Modi’s visit to Israel, Larry Summers, former Harvard University president and former secretary of the US Treasury, asked Epstein if he still thought Trump was a better president than rival candidate Hillary Clinton would have been. Epstein responded affirmatively, stating, “yes, defintley India israel. for example great and all his doing (sic).”

In another conversation revealed in the latest document drop, Epstein offered to arrange a meeting between Modi and former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon just hours after Modi had won a thumping majority in the Indian national election in 2019.

In an iMessage to Bannon on May 19, 2019, Epstein wrote, “modi sending someone to see me on thurs,” referring to Ambani.

That Thursday, May 23, Epstein met Ambani in New York and his calendar for that day shows no other meeting scheduled.

After the meeting with Ambani, Epstein wrote to Bannon: “really interesting modi meeting. He won [the 2019 parliamentary elections] with HUGE mandate. His guy said that no one in wash speaks to him however his main enemy is CHINA!   And their proxy in the region pakistan. They will host the g20 in 22.. Totally buys into your vision.”

Epstein then messaged Ambani: “I think mr modi might enjoy meeting steve bannon, you all share the china problem.” And Ambani wrote back: “sure.”

Epstein then wrote back to Bannon: “modi on board.”

It is not immediately clear if Ambani was authorised to approve such decisions on behalf of the Indian government. There is no public record either of a meeting between Bannon and Indian officials that summer.

Hardeep Singh Puri, Indian politician

Another major Indian name featured in the Epstein files is Hardeep Singh Puri, who retired from the Indian Foreign Service to join Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in 2014.

In the documents are email exchanges between Puri and Epstein that began in June 2014, with the sex offender writing to Puri about Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn, and arranging a visit by Hoffman to India.

Following an exchange of emails, Puri wrote a detailed pitch for investment opportunities in India to Epstein and Hoffman, laying out economic plans in India under the newly elected Modi government, and urging Hoffman to visit. Documents also show Puri met Epstein at his Manhattan townhouse on at least three occasions: February 4, 2015; January 6, 2016; and May 19, 2017.

Puri told Indian media on Sunday that his visits and interactions with Epstein were strictly business-related.

In December 2014, Puri wrote to Epstein again by email. “Please let me know when you are back from your exotic island,” he wrote, asking to set up a meeting in which Puri could give Epstein some books to “excite an interest in India”.

How has the Indian government responded?

India has dismissed the references to Modi in the Epstein files.

“Beyond the fact of the prime minister’s official visit to Israel in July 2017, the rest of the allusions in the email are little more than trashy ruminations by a convicted criminal, which deserve to be dismissed with the utmost contempt,” External Affairs Ministry Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said on Saturday.

However, the opposition, led by the Congress Party, has demanded answers about the latest disclosures – particularly those relating to Israel relations.

The Congress Party’s general secretary in charge of organisation, KC Venugopal, wrote in a post on X: “The reports of the new batch of Epstein Files are a huge wake-up call about the kind of monsters who have access to PM Modi, and how susceptible he is to foreign manipulation. The Congress demands that the Prime Minister personally come clean on these disturbing disclosures that raise serious questions.”

Kevin Rudd, former Australian prime minister

Australian diplomat Kevin Rudd, who served as the country’s prime minister from 2007 to 2010 and again in 2013, has also been named in the Epstein files.

Rudd’s name appeared on Epstein’s daily meeting schedule for June 8, 2014, at 4:30pm. On that day, Epstein flew to New York from his private island, Little Saint James in the US Virgin Islands, for several meetings, including with Rudd.

Rudd, who is currently serving as Australia’s ambassador to the US, claims he did not visit Epstein and denies any friendship with him.

But the newly released files show that two days before the scheduled appointment, Epstein emailed his assistant, Lesley Groff, on June 6, 2014 to ask for non-vegetarian food to be made available at the upcoming Sunday lunch “as now kevin rudd is also coming”. Rudd was not in government at the time.

Just seconds later, Epstein follows up in another email to Groff: “Kevin Rudd might also stop by former prime minister austrailia [sic].”

Peter Mandelson, UK politician

The name of Peter Mandelson, a former UK cabinet minister and life peer, had appeared in tranches of Epstein files previously made public. But he resigned from his membership of the UK’s ruling Labour Party on Sunday after yet more links to Epstein surfaced in the latest dump.

Mandelson was sacked as the UK’s ambassador to the US last year over his connections to Epstein.

The latest documents reveal that Epstein made $75,000 in payments to Mandelson in three separate transactions in 2003 and 2004.

In his resignation letter to Labour’s general secretary, Mandelson wrote: “I have been further linked this weekend to the understandable furore surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and I feel regretful and sorry about this.”

He said he had “no recollection” of the payments, however.

The latest documents also show that Mandelson discussed with Epstein by email a campaign against Rudd’s proposed mining tax, which would have taxed “super profits” reaped by mining companies at 40 percent, while Rudd was still prime minister.

Mette-Marit, Norway’s crown princess

The latest disclosures from the US Justice Department have embroiled Norway’s crown princess, Mette-Marit, in the Epstein scandal, as they reveal her years of extensive contact with the sex offender.

Mette-Marit, who is married to Crown Prince Haakon, the heir apparent to the Norwegian throne, appears nearly 1,000 times in the Epstein files, with scores of emails sent between the two.

In the emails, Mette-Marit told Epstein, “you tickle my brain”, and called him “soft hearted” and “such a sweetheart”. In another, she thanked Epstein for flowers he had sent when she was feeling unwell, signing off with “Love, Mm”.

In 2012, Mette-Marit told Epstein he was “very charming” and asked if it was “inappropriate for a mother to suggest two naked women carrying a surfboard for my 15 yr old sons wallpaper?”

The revelations come at a tricky time for Norway’s royal family, with Mette-Marit’s son, Marius Borg Hoiby – who was born before her marriage to Crown Prince Haakon – set to go on trial for rape later this week. Hoiby has been accused of 38 crimes, including the rapes of four women as well as assault and drug offences.

Miroslav Lajcak, Slovakian national security adviser

The new tranche of Espstein files has also prompted the resignation of Slovakia’s national security adviser, Miroslav Lajcak.

Photos and emails released with the documents reveal that he met with Epstein several years after the sex offender was released from jail and exchanged text messages about women in 2018 during his second spell as foreign minister.

On Sunday, Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico accepted Lajcak’s resignation, and wrote on Facebook that the government was losing “an incredible source of experience and knowledge in foreign policy”, adding that the former minister had “categorically denied and rejected” the allegations made against him.

Pakistan’s decision to boycott their T20 World Cup game against India has been termed a political move, with cricketers and politicians in both countries and around the world urging the International Cricket Council (ICC) to resolve the dispute.

The Pakistani government on Sunday issued a statement saying its men’s cricket team will participate in the global tournament but will not take the field in the match against archrivals India on February 15.

In a swift response, the ICC was critical of Pakistan’s move of “selective participation” and asked the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) to consider the “significant and long-term implications” of its decision.

A decades-old political rift between the two nuclear-armed countries is blamed for their frosty sporting ties.

Pakistan was carved out of India in 1947, resulting in a bloody division of the subcontinent by the colonial British. Over the past 78 years, the nations have fought four wars, exchanged countless skirmishes and remained at odds primarily over the disputed Kashmir region that both claim in entirety but administer parts of.

The South Asian archrivals returned from the brink of an all-out war in May, when both countries clashed at their shared border before an internationally-brokered ceasefire.

An official of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has supported the ICC’s statement asking Pakistan to reconsider the move.

“The ICC has issued a big statement, they have spoken about sportsmanship,” BCCI’s Vice President Rajeev Shukla told the ANI news agency in India.

“We completely agree with the ICC. BCCI won’t make any comments on it until we speak with the ICC.”

However, former cricketers and politicians have called upon the ICC to act as a mediator between both countries’ cricket boards.

“Cricket can open doors when politics closes them,” former Pakistan captain Shahid Afridi wrote on X.

He urged the ICC to “lead and prove through decisions, not statements, that it is impartial, independent and fair to every member.”

‘Sport has been politicised’

Prominent Indian politician Shashi Tharoor was critical of the politicisation of cricket, and slammed the BCCI’s decision to expel Bangladeshi fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman from the Indian Premier League in January.

“It is pretty disgraceful that sport has been politicised in this way on both sides,” he told reporters in New Delhi.

“I don’t think that Mustafizur should have been denied his contract to play in Kolkata. It was most unfortunate. [An] intrusion of politics. I think the Bangladeshi reaction was an overreaction, but it is also a reflection of the same, and Pakistan is trying to show its solidarity with Bangladesh. ”

Tharoor, who is a member of India’s main opposition party, said the situation was “spiralling out of control”.

“Sports, especially a sport like cricket which means so much to all the people, should be a means of bringing us together at least on the playing field, rather than allowing this to go on like this,” he said.

The 69-year-old, who is also an author of several books on history and politics, called on the ICC to help mend the ties.

“This is now a wake-up call for all concerned to contact each other on an emergency basis. The ICC could be the platform for it. Just say, ‘Let’s call off this nonsense’. You can’t go on like this forever.”

Pakistan’s decision, which came six days before the start of the World Cup, has cast a shadow on the marquee fixture of the group stage.

India and Pakistan were scheduled to play in Colombo on February 15 in a game that attracts millions of viewers from across the world and is seen as a major revenue-generating fixture for the tournament’s organisers and sponsors.

Outspoken former Pakistan captain Rashid Latif said Pakistan could face sanctions from the ICC, but such a move would be hypocritical as teams have boycotted games at previous World Cups.

“Where was ICC when Australia and West Indies forfeited their matches in 1996; England refusing to travel to Harare and New Zealand to Nairobi in 2003,” he said on X.

Latif, who played 37 Tests and 166 one-day internationals (ODIs), feared that Pakistan may be sanctioned by the ICC.

“They [Pakistan] don’t seem to care about it,” he said.

‘Would Pakistan refuse to play the final?’

Should Pakistan keep their word and boycott the group game, they will forfeit two points, which could have an impact on their standings in Group A.

Pakistan and India could meet again in the tournament, in the final on March 8, but with the multiple stages of progress between the group game and the final, it is unclear how that match would pan out.

Former England captain Kevin Pietersen questioned whether Pakistan would boycott the tournament decider as well.

“Would Pakistan refuse to play the World Cup final?” he asked.

Cricketers from across the border condemned Pakistan’s boycott of the game.

“This isn’t about guts at all, this is about foolishness,” Madan Lal, a former Test cricketer and coach, told Indian media.

“Because Pakistan wants to show India down, that’s why they’re taking all these decisions. That’s the reason their growth isn’t happening, either. If you keep looking at others, what will you do for your own growth?”

Indian cricket writer and commentator Harsha Bhogle said the boycott could deal a financial blow to Pakistan cricket.

“If there is an inevitable reduction in the ICC’s revenue caused by Pakistan’s forfeit and future uncertainty, the least affected countries, given other strong sources of revenue, will be India, Australia and England,” he said in a social media post.

“The most affected will be those completely reliant on revenues from the ICC; not just the smaller and associate nations but also the West Indies, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and…… Pakistan!”

Pakistan will open their T20 World Cup campaign on the opening day, February 7, against the Netherlands in Colombo.

The 2009 champions will play all their games, including any Super 8 fixtures and knockouts, in Sri Lanka.

This follows an ICC-brokered agreement between the PCB and the BCCI in December 2024 that allows both teams to play their games at a neutral venue when the neighbour hosts an ICC event.

Pakistan’s remaining Group A fixtures are against the United States on February 10 and against Namibia on February 18.

The executions are part of broader crackdown by Beijing on centres across Southeast Asia, which are built on an industrial scale and hunt scam victims across the globe, as well as running kidnapping, prostitution and drugs rackets.

China has executed four people found guilty of causing six Chinese citizens’ deaths and running scam and gambling operations out of Myanmar worth more than $4bn.

The Shenzhen Intermediate People’s Court in southern China announced the executions on Monday morning in a statement. However, the timing of the executions was not clear.

The executions of 11 other people convicted of running scam centres in Myanmar had been announced last week.

The Shenzhen court sentenced five people accused of running a network of scam centres and casinos to death in November. One of the defendants, group leader Bai Suocheng, died of illness before the sentence was carried out.

The group had established industrial parks in Myanmar’s Kokang region bordering China, from where they allegedly ran gambling and telecom scam operations involving abductions, extortion, forced prostitution, and drug manufacturing and trafficking.

They defrauded victims of more than 29 billion yuan ($4.2bn) and caused the deaths of six Chinese citizens and injuries to others, the court said.

Their crimes “were exceptionally heinous, with particularly serious circumstances and consequences, posing a tremendous threat to society”, the court’s statement said.

The defendants appealed the verdict, but the Guangdong Provincial High People’s Court dismissed their applications, it added.

The executions are part of a broader crackdown by Beijing on scam operations in Southeast Asia, where scam parks have become an industrial-scale business, especially in Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos.

A mix of trafficked and willing labour has carried out digital scams on victims around the world, including thousands of Chinese citizens.

Authorities in the region face growing international pressure from China, the United States and other nations to address the proliferation of crime.

Experts say most of the centres are run by Chinese-led crime syndicates working with Myanmar armed groups, taking advantage of the country’s instability amid the ongoing war.

Myanmar’s military government has long been accused of turning a blind eye, but it has trumpeted a crackdown over the last year after being lobbied by key military backer China, experts say.

In October, more than 2,000 people were arrested in a raid on KK Park, an infamous scam centre on Myanmar’s border with Thailand.

However, some raids mounted by the government have been part of a propaganda effort, according to monitors, choreographed to vent pressure from Beijing without denting profits that enrich the military’s militia allies.

It’s called Pakistan’s forgotten war. And it’s been running for decades in Balochistan, the country’s largest province by land area.

More than 100 people have been killed in another wave of violence this week.

The Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) has claimed responsibility for the attacks, described as the deadliest so far.

The BLA has escalated its attacks in recent years, saying it is fighting for an independent Balochistan.

In Islamabad, the government blames what it says are its enemies for the violence.

So, what will it take to end the cycle of violence in Balochistan?

Presenter: Maleen Saeed

Guests

Raashid Wali Janjua – director of research at Islamabad Policy Research Institute

Sanaullah Baloch – Balochistan National Party leader

Ayesha Siddiqa – senior research fellow at Defence Studies Department at King’s College London

BREAKINGBREAKING,

This is a breaking news story, more details to follow.

Pakistan’s cricket team has been cleared to participate in the ICC T20 World Cup 2026 but will not play its game against India, the government of Pakistan said in a statement.

“The Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan grants approval to the Pakistan Cricket Team to participate in the ICC World T20 2026, however, the Pakistan Cricket Team shall not take the field in the match scheduled on 15th February 2026 against India,” the statement said on Sunday.

The T20 World Cup, co-hosted by India and Sri Lanka, features 20 nations and begins on Saturday.

Pakistan are drawn in Group A along with India, Namibia, Netherlands and US, and are playing all their matches in Sri Lanka. Pakistan’s first match on Saturday is against Netherlands at the Sinhalese Sports Club Cricket Ground in the Sri Lankan capital, Colombo.

If Pakistan boycotts their match against India, they will forfeit two points.

More to follow…

Modi’s government presents annual budget, focusing on sustaining growth despite volatile financial markets and trade uncertainty.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government has unveiled its annual budget, aiming for steady growth in an uncertain global economy rocked by recent tariff wars.

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman presented the budget for the 2026-2027 financial year in Parliament on Sunday, prioritising infrastructure and domestic manufacturing, with a total expenditure estimated at $583bn.

India’s economy has so far weathered punitive tariffs of 50 percent imposed by United States President Donald Trump over New Delhi’s imports of Russian oil. The government has sought to offset the impact of those duties by striking deals, such as its trade agreement with the European Union.

Despite the past year’s challenges, the Indian economy has remained one of the world’s fastest growing.

The budget for the new financial year, which starts on April 1, projects gross domestic product (GDP) growth in the range of 6.8 to 7.2 percent, according to the government’s annual Economic Survey presented in Parliament. It is a shade softer than this year’s projected 7.4 percent but still outpaces estimates by global institutions such as the World Bank.

To keep growth strong, the government said it will spend 12.2 trillion rupees ($133bn) on infrastructure in the new fiscal year, compared with 11.2 trillion rupees ($122bn) last year. It will also aim to boost manufacturing in seven strategic sectors, including pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, rare-earth magnets, chemicals, capital goods, textiles and sports goods while stepping up investments in niche industries like artificial intelligence.

Despite plans to prop up growth with state spending, the government is aiming to bring down the federal government debt-to-GDP ratio from 56.1 percent to 55.6 percent in the next financial year and the fiscal deficit from its current projected level of 4.4 percent of GDP to 4.3 percent.

Sitharaman offered no populist giveaways, saying New Delhi would focus on building resilience at home while strengthening its position in global supply chains, marking a departure from last year’s budget, which wooed the salaried middle class with steep tax cuts.

Before the budget presentation, Modi on Thursday said the nation was “moving away from long-term problems to tread the path of long-term solutions”.

“Long term solutions provide predictability that fosters trust in the world,” he said.

Modi’s government has struggled to raise manufacturing from its current level of contributing under 20 percent of India’s GDP to 25 percent to generate jobs for the millions of people entering the nation’s workforce each year.

It has also seen a sharp decline in the value of the rupee, which has recently weakened to all-time lows after foreign investors sold a record amount of Indian equities. Those sales have added up to $22bn since January last year.

“Overall, this is a budget without fireworks – not a big positive, not a big negative,” Aishvarya Dadheech, founder and chief investment officer at Mumbai-based Fident Asset Management, told the Reuters news agency.

From farmers protesting in Europe against a trade agreement between the European Union and the South American bloc Mercosur to deadly attacks in Pakistan’s Balochistan province that killed nearly 200 people and demonstrations in Cuba opposing threats by the United States, here is a look at the week in photos.

Follow our live build-up, with toss and team news, ahead of the crucial group stage match in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe.